Vote the Diary

[caz]

Also the poll says "Old forger" and I don't think whoever forged it was young.

It also says:

"View Poll Results: The Dairy of Jack the Ripper was written by..."

Cue ancient jokes about cash cows and holy cows.

Maybe it should be called the Forge of JtR, as its maker was meant to be anvil personified.

Personally I'm not sure it's one thing or the udder, but I've gone for the old forger - and a couple of yogurts please.

Love,

The Old Cow
X

[GUT]

G'day Chaz

Not I can't stop laughing.

[Hunter]

I thought Chaz was Sonny and Cher's daughter who now thinks he's/she's their son... LOL.. No... Caroline's wit is unsurpassed, no doubt.

[GUT]

And I can't type.

[GUT]

Sorry Caz

[The Good Michael]

It also says:

"View Poll Results: The Dairy of Jack the Ripper was written by..."

Cue ancient jokes about cash cows and holy cows.

Maybe it should be called the Forge of JtR, as its maker was meant to be anvil personified.

Personally I'm not sure it's one thing or the udder, but I've gone for the old forger - and a couple of yogurts please.

Love,

The Old Cow
X

I'll have none of that bellowing about forges. It upsets me that everyone just hammers on this nonsense on a daily basis, and I'm not sure that this isn't something Caz has wrought. But me? I'm going to go chisel away at the Tabram mystery, see if I can iron out a few things.

Mike

[GUT]

Personally I think Jim has a cast iron alibi.

[Damaso Marte]

I know nothing about ink testing, manuscript dating, or any of that stuff. I know only about the Whitechapel murders. And to me, when I look at the text of the diary, it seems obvious that it was written in the 1980's or 1990's. It has a wholly modern view of the killings.

[caz]

Hi Damaso,

And you are perfectly entitled to hold your wholly 1994 view of the diary.

If you were as satisfied it came out of Battlecrease as I am, as Keith Skinner is, and as the people who know are, but won't freely admit, would you reconsider your view of the text? Or could you easily reconcile it with modern hoaxers engineering the Battlecrease "discovery", to provide the perfect provenance, then doing everything they possibly could to play it down, deny it, or otherwise undermine it?

I have had to ask myself questions like this and hundreds more, and with the best will in the world I still cannot reconcile the emergence of the thing, the people allegedly involved, the scientific findings, you name it, with a text as recent as the late 80s. I wish I could, but none of it adds up when you delve beneath the comfort blanket of Mike Barrett's facile claims.

Love,

Caz
X

[pinkmoon]

Hi Damaso,

And you are perfectly entitled to hold your wholly 1994 view of the diary.

If you were as satisfied it came out of Battlecrease as I am, as Keith Skinner is, and as the people who know are, but won't freely admit, would you reconsider your view of the text, or could you reconcile it with modern hoaxers engineering the Battlecrease "discovery", to provide the perfect provenance, then doing everything they possibly could to play it down, deny it, or otherwise undermine it?

I have had to ask myself questions like this and hundreds more, and with the best will in the world I still cannot reconcile the emergence of the thing, the people allegedly involved, the scientific findings, you name it, with a text as recent as the late 80s. I wish I could, but none of it adds up when you delve beneath the comfort blanket of Mike Barrett's facile claims.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi caz,I think we can all agree on one thing the connection or maybe the catalyst for the diary was the workmen from battlecrease drinking in Mr Barretts second home the saddlers pub.

[caz]

And to me, when I look at the text of the diary, it seems obvious that it was written in the 1980's or 1990's. It has a wholly modern view of the killings.

Not wholly modern, surely? If the hoaxer(s) had used the late 1980s ripper books they'd have needed for some of the information in the diary, they could have learned that MJK's breasts were not left on the table, for instance, and would not have had 'Sir Jim' reading the papers and repeating this error, then later recalling that he had thought of putting them by her feet. Why get it wrong and then put it half right? They would have read that one breast was indeed found by her foot, while the other was under her head. If they failed to absorb this 'new' information, how did they arrive at the foot afterthought? If they read it but were not sure what was correct, why mention the position of the breasts at all?

Love,

Caz
X

[Paddy]

Florence Maybrick

Please forgive my ignorance of this case I know nothing of it. Today I found a DVD about the Diary and decided to watch it.
I am sure it has been discussed before but is there any chance that Florence his wife could have written the diary after she was released from prison in 1904?
I have a copy of a document she wrote stating she was going abroad from America for two months in 1906. On this she states she is a literary writer and it struck me that she probably would know details also.
It could have been some kind of justification to any who doubted that she was innocent?
I have tried comparing her handwriting to the diary but would have to enlarge the print and compare.
Just wondered if this has been discussed before?

Thanks
Pat.....................................

[pinkmoon]

Please forgive my ignorance of this case I know nothing of it. Today I found a DVD about the Diary and decided to watch it.
I am sure it has been discussed before but is there any chance that Florence his wife could have written the diary after she was released from prison in 1904?
I have a copy of a document she wrote stating she was going abroad from America for two months in 1906. On this she states she is a literary writer and it struck me that she probably would know details also.
It could have been some kind of justification to any who doubted that she was innocent?
I have tried comparing her handwriting to the diary but would have to enlarge the print and compare.
Just wondered if this has been discussed before?

Thanks
Pat.....................................

Hi pat,I think it was written at the time of her trial or very shortly after when she wasn't hung it was never released on the general public.I would like to point out I have absolutely no evidence to support this also I would like to point out that nobody in their right mind would involve mike Barrett in any form of scam or attempt at forgery.

[MayBea]

...I think we can all agree on one thing the connection or maybe the catalyst for the diary was the workmen from battlecrease drinking in Mr Barretts second home the saddlers pub.

However, I, for one, still believe that Mrs. Barrett's is a descendant of Florence Maybrick. Feldman discovered the trail of the Diary through the step-mother.

Have you seen pictures of Anne? I think her picture was consistent with those of Florence and her mother.

A simple DNA test would prove if she is related to Florence's family, and even if she is of Colonial American extraction.

[pinkmoon]

However, I, for one, still believe that Mrs. Barrett's is a descendant of Florence Maybrick. Feldman discovered the trail of the Diary through the step-mother.

Have you seen pictures of Anne? I think her picture was consistent with those of Florence and her mother.

A simple DNA test would prove if she is related to Florence's family, and even if she is of Colonial American extraction.

The fact that anne won't allow any DNA testing speaks volumes to me my dear